I'm sorry, but how at all is this a useful reads list? And then bragging about it in 780? You literally have no justification for anything. The only two actual references to something that's happened are something scummy you thought hoopla did (while you are townreading that slot) and something towny you though BBT did (you are scumreading that slot).In post 757, I Am Innocent wrote:Just from the catchup, for instance ur unvote/contradiction from an earlier stance where you don't like to wait until deadline to get claims would have been a negative point:In post 750, Hoopla wrote:Can you post a list of your reads from town --> scum? Maybe even with scores if you're feeling friendly?
Town: Cloud, Hoopla, BlackVoid, Victor, Sotty
Null/Town Lean: Rask, TwoFace, Michel, Maria
Null Scum: GoodMorning
Scum: GreyIce, Jaack
3 of the town reads dropped strong town tells (including yourself), both scum read dropped a early game scum tells in addition to poor posts. Good Morning to did not have one positive post either. BBT was the only of my scum reads to have a good post, and it was for his early vote on the Rask wagon since I saw something there early on. Of course Rask has since been more townie, so that one post doesn't offset the number of bad posts/scum tell that slot dropped.
Now you can say you have this magical list and you aren't going to share it because "they'll stop dropping those scumtells" but that makes your accusations 100% useless. Especially considering you go against that in the quoted post - you do give an example of something scummy that Hoopla did. So give evidence or stop parading around as some town paragon. Even if GI and I are scum (which I'm not, and I don't think GI is either) and we would purposely stop dropping these scumtells, it doesn't mean they don't already exist in thread as evidence.
The contradiction is that you push rask to vote BBT immediately after saying you'll wait and allow BBT to post more.In post 795, Sotty7 wrote:I asked Rask's opionon of my BBT meta which was from awhile back. She said I was wrong I said okay, let me wait for BBT to post more and we can take it from there. Nothing contradictory.In post 754, Jaack wrote:This feels contradictory. Her case on BBT was a good part meta, but after Rask sort of argues against that (209), sotty wants to simultaneously drop discussion of BBT's meta while also getting Rask to vote?
Upon further examination, I will concede this. I didn't originally feel as if your discussions with TwoFace were particularly productive and it felt more like you were biding your time until BBT came back and you could focus on him again. On a second read, I don't think you're pushes on TwoFace are as intense as your pushes on BBT, which does give me pause, but it's the smoking gun I considered it before.In post 795, Sotty7 wrote:Okay that's just blatantly untrue. I push Twoface hard and we have an extensive back and forth that could have easily became a death tunnel. I am interacting and questioning twoface who starts off answering me and then just really falls back to insulting and taking pot shots at me. I pushed his voting behavior, I asked him for several reads a couple of pages back that he still hasn't provided. What would you consider "pushing a scum read"? Vote them then disappear for several pages and never interacting or questioning them again like you have been doing with me?In post 754, Jaack wrote:But in that interim, she does very little to push on that TwoFace vote.
As for the shade on me, I get it. I screwed up by being lazy and not participating for a good section of this game. If I get lynched for it that's on me. But that fact that you keep bringing up every time I try and do something now is counterproductive. Well, at least it's detrimental to me trying to contribute. Just because I had a bad start to the game doesn't mean I can't have something to say now.